|
|
Post by seastape on Feb 6, 2018 9:31:19 GMT -8
Considering the two knocks against OSU at this time ((1) bad team the last five years and (2) new, rookie head coach), I think the new staff did well, especially with the new early signing period (which obviously favors schools with established coaches).
Look at the dudes (number after names are stars on 247):
QB (2): Dukart (3), Colletto (3)
OL (2): Levengood (3), Gray (3)
WR (1): Irish (3)
TE (2): Smalls (3), Dawkins (3)
RB (1): Jefferson (3)
DL (4): Hodgins (3), Bickler (3), Reichner (3), Audette (3)
LB (3): Francois (3), Tago (3), Saluni (3)
CB (2): Wilson (3), Robinson (3)
S (1): Tufaga (3)
ATH (2): Rogers (3), McCartan (3)
That's 20 guys, all 3-star rated. Most teams most years seem to have 4-6 starters each on both sides of the ball leaving after every year. So, that essentially means that a team needs to recruit 8-12 starters every year. Are there 8-12 starters in this class? I usually think that a 3-star player=real potential to start by the end of his college career. Here, we got 20 guys. If half of them become starters by the time that they are seniors and OSU is having winning seasons by that time, I would say that means that we got a solid class. I look a the names and I see plenty of guys who can start at some point, some who will be busts, and some who will surprise.
I would like to see another WR and OL, and maybe another RB, but even so, I think Smith and staff have done a good job for the first year.
By the way, I am one of the few people who thinks that stars matter. Yes, there have been 0-2-star players that have won, for example, the Biletnekoff Award and 5-star busts, but in general, the stars pan out. For all those who reject the star system, would you really say it doesn't matter if 3/4 of OSU's class was 4-star and the rest 3-star?
|
|
cake
Sophomore
Posts: 1,524 
|
Post by cake on Feb 6, 2018 10:47:07 GMT -8
I think that's the key, showing up and staying 4 or 5 years. When Colorado suddenly got good in 2016, they had only lost I think 1 guy out of that year's class of seniors. We've had so many classes where the best two guys never qualify or they quit and go somewhere else or get run off or whatever. I like the class too, they're all guys who seem like they could/should develop.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Feb 6, 2018 11:28:49 GMT -8
We also have some committed invited walk-ons who are not on that list, but who have scholarship offers from other schools, at the FBS/FCS level.
The in-state walk-on program was a big part of our success during the Riley I and Riley II eras. Glad to see it becoming a point of emphasis again.
|
|
|
|
Post by nforkbeav on Feb 6, 2018 13:21:46 GMT -8
Thought I read somewhere OSU offered Tago as a QB?
|
|
BeaverNut23
Freshman
WOOOOOO Feels dam Good to beat those Hogs! GO BEAVSSS!!
Posts: 553
|
Post by BeaverNut23 on Feb 6, 2018 13:38:07 GMT -8
I think u missed a 4⭐️ player on your list
|
|
|
|
Post by ochobeavo on Feb 6, 2018 13:46:49 GMT -8
Thought I read somewhere OSU offered Tago as a QB? Nebraska was the only school that offered him at QB. |
|
|
|
Post by blackbug on Feb 6, 2018 14:24:49 GMT -8
Considering the two knocks against OSU at this time ((1) bad team the last five years and (2) new, rookie head coach), I think the new staff did well, especially with the new early signing period (which obviously favors schools with established coaches).
Look at the dudes (number after names are stars on 247):
QB (2): Dukart (3), Colletto (3)
OL (2): Levengood (3), Gray (3)
WR (1): Irish (3)
TE (2): Smalls (3), Dawkins (3)
RB (1): Jefferson (3)
DL (4): Hodgins (3), Bickler (3), Reichner (3), Audette (3)
LB (3): Francois (3), Tago (3), Saluni (3)
CB (2): Wilson (3), Robinson (3)
S (1): Tufaga (3)
ATH (2): Rogers (3), McCartan (3)
That's 20 guys, all 3-star rated. Most teams most years seem to have 4-6 starters each on both sides of the ball leaving after every year. So, that essentially means that a team needs to recruit 8-12 starters every year. Are there 8-12 starters in this class? I usually think that a 3-star player=real potential to start by the end of his college career. Here, we got 20 guys. If half of them become starters by the time that they are seniors and OSU is having winning seasons by that time, I would say that means that we got a solid class. I look a the names and I see plenty of guys who can start at some point, some who will be busts, and some who will surprise.
I would like to see another WR and OL, and maybe another RB, but even so, I think Smith and staff have done a good job for the first year.
By the way, I am one of the few people who thinks that stars matter. Yes, there have been 0-2-star players that have won, for example, the Biletnekoff Award and 5-star busts, but in general, the stars pan out. For all those who reject the star system, would you really say it doesn't matter if 3/4 of OSU's class was 4-star and the rest 3-star?
Dawkins will be a OL. |
|
|
|
Post by mountainbeaver on Feb 6, 2018 14:46:17 GMT -8
I wouldn’t draw too many conclusions one way or the other from this
class given the short recruiting period the staff had. In the end, I doubt
we’ll ever have a particularly highly rated class. I think for us to be
successful we’ve got to be better than the other guys at evaluating
talent. There’s only so many can’t miss prospects and they’re probably
going to a football factory school with tons of money. Riley had a guy
named Jim Gilstrap I think, who was one of those guys who was really
good at player evaluation. We need to have that kind of guy if we’re going
to find the hidden gems out there. If we’re going to be competitive with
the the big football schools, we’re going to have to be smarter and do
some things differently.
|
|
|
|
Post by blackbug on Feb 6, 2018 15:13:39 GMT -8
Nontraditional transfers are becoming a bigger part of recruiting. It is near impossible to determine how a team did with transfers each recruiting cycle. Right now we have Isaac Garcia as a transfer at defensive end and Brandon Kipper transferring from Hawaii as a OL. These 2 transfers may be among the best "recruits" of this class. If anyone knows of transfers I missed then please share.
|
|
|
|
Post by blackbug on Feb 6, 2018 16:59:31 GMT -8
A concern I have is whether there are enough OL commits. Currently they are bringing in 4 this class. Traditionally, we usually need 5-6 each class just to maintain the numbers. The amount of medical retirements are heavily swayed towards OL. Our current numbers of scholarship OL is at 17 with what is coming in the class. This could change if the staff decides any of the walkon OL deserve a scholarship. You expect some attrition in the ranks 1 to 2 before fall. This would put them as low as 15 on the OL. Proper depth would be 16-18. I wonder whether they planned properly for the depth here. This was a problem last year as the OL performed poorly compared to 2016 and I think depth limited competition affecting performance. The roster only had 14 scholarship OL in 2017. Losing 3 senior OL in 2016 obviously did not help as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Feb 6, 2018 17:10:53 GMT -8
A concern I have is whether there are enough OL commits. Currently they are bringing in 4 this class. Traditionally, we usually need 5-6 each class just to maintain the numbers. The amount of medical retirements are heavily swayed towards OL. Our current numbers of scholarship OL is at 17 with what is coming in the class. This could change if the staff decides any of the walkon OL deserve a scholarship. You expect some attrition in the ranks 1 to 2 before fall. This would put them as low as 15 on the OL. Proper depth would be 16-18. I wonder whether they planned properly for the depth here. This was a problem last year as the OL performed poorly compared to 2016 and I think depth limited competition affecting performance. The roster only had 14 scholarship OL in 2017. Losing 3 senior OL in 2016 obviously did not help as well. "planned properly for depth"? 62 or so days ago Coach Smith was working by himself. We didn't have a coaching staff to plan for this class, and by the number of future offers this staff already has out, 2-3 years is what it takes to complete a recruiting class, not 2 months. They did a heck of a decent job just getting the class they're bringing in without having gaping holes at a few positions. I won't be surprised if at least 2-3 more new scholarship players appear before next season. |
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Feb 6, 2018 17:33:00 GMT -8
Nontraditional transfers are becoming a bigger part of recruiting. It is near impossible to determine how a team did with transfers each recruiting cycle. Right now we have Isaac Garcia as a transfer at defensive end and Brandon Kipper transferring from Hawaii as a OL. These 2 transfers may be among the best "recruits" of this class. If anyone knows of transfers I missed then please share. I forgot about Kipper on my list...that is a good pickup, especially according to A fair number of Hawaii fans. |
|
|
|
Post by blackbug on Feb 6, 2018 18:35:21 GMT -8
A concern I have is whether there are enough OL commits. Currently they are bringing in 4 this class. Traditionally, we usually need 5-6 each class just to maintain the numbers. The amount of medical retirements are heavily swayed towards OL. Our current numbers of scholarship OL is at 17 with what is coming in the class. This could change if the staff decides any of the walkon OL deserve a scholarship. You expect some attrition in the ranks 1 to 2 before fall. This would put them as low as 15 on the OL. Proper depth would be 16-18. I wonder whether they planned properly for the depth here. This was a problem last year as the OL performed poorly compared to 2016 and I think depth limited competition affecting performance. The roster only had 14 scholarship OL in 2017. Losing 3 senior OL in 2016 obviously did not help as well. "planned properly for depth"? 62 or so days ago Coach Smith was working by himself. We didn't have a coaching staff to plan for this class, and by the number of future offers this staff already has out, 2-3 years is what it takes to complete a recruiting class, not 2 months. They did a heck of a decent job just getting the class they're bringing in without having gaping holes at a few positions. I won't be surprised if at least 2-3 more new scholarship players appear before next season. I agree with your sentiment. I would add having only 62 days does not change what positions you need to recruit for building the roster only the quality you will be able to obtain on short notice. The only way that the quality inhibition would affect obtaining less commits at one position versus another is if the quality found at another position far outweighed the quality at the position of need. It is about weighing quality versus need. If there is no attrition at OL then the roster depth will be fine. Just as you said, there is some recruiting that continues all the way up to fall camp, so we will see some new faces. It will be interesting to see what happens. Another position to watch is DL. Currently, there is a plan to have 8 on roster with scholarship. I think this will change. Ideally teams want 3 deep on the DL. This means we are at least 1 short for optimal depth. I think this will be addressed primarily by position changes. |
|
|
|
Post by obf on Feb 7, 2018 8:57:06 GMT -8
By the way, I am one of the few people who thinks that stars matter. Yes, there have been 0-2-star players that have won, for example, the Biletnekoff Award and 5-star busts, but in general, the stars pan out. For all those who reject the star system, would you really say it doesn't matter if 3/4 of OSU's class was 4-star and the rest 3-star?
If we did magically have a class that was 75% 4 stars they would all magically become 3 stars by the time they signed... The recruiting ranking business is just that, a business, and there is no money in letting it look like the lowly Beavers have had any success... Yesterday Tago was a 4 star and today he is 3... makes it all seem pretty meaningless to me... |
|
